ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December 5, 2002
     
    BRIAN FINLEY, individually, LOCAL 3315
    of the AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
    STATE, COUNTY, & MUNICIPAL
    EMPLOYEES (COOK COUNTY PUBLIC
    DEFENDERS ASSOCIATION), and the
    following additional individuals: LISA A.
    KOSOWSKI, QUENTIN PITLUK, MARTHA
    C. NEIRA, JOEL TOBIN, TACYE
    VERSHER, SEAN VARGAS-BARLOW,
    ROSA FLORES, DANITA KIRK, JENNIFER
    BOROWITZ-GUTZKE, OPHELIA BARNER-
    COLEMAN, KARIN WENZEL, BARBARA
    A. BLAINE, VALLERIA FORNEY, JAMES
    BURTON, AMANDA LAMERATO,
    JENNIFER HOMBURGER, THOMAS
    GRIPPANDO, KATE HAARVEI, K. MARY
    FLYNN, CHRIS WILLIAMS, ALPA J.
    PATEL, PAMELA D. MOSS, LILIANA J.
    DAGO, PATRICIA CINTRON-BASTIN,
    TAMMY EVANS, CELESTE K. JONES,
    WILLIAM A. GOMEZ, KAREN MAHER,
    TRESA LOUISE JACKSON, MARCIA G.
    HAWK, MARIZOL RODRIGUEZ,
    MODHURI K. PATEL, JOSE A. PEREZ,
    NICHOLAS A. YOUNGBLOOD,
    CATHLEEN REYNOLDS, DAWN M.
    ROESENER, KIMBERLIE BOONE, AMY E.
    McCARTHY, QUENTIN HALL,
    GWENDALYN GRANT, GAIL DAILY,
    COREY E. MYERS, MARIA DI
    CRESCENZO, MARIBEL RODRIGUEZ,
    FELICIA BATES, DARNELL TROTTER,
    HATTIE MARTIN, AUGUSTUS
    PINCKNEY, GEORGE SANCHEZ, LIZETTE
    U. McBRIDE, DEBORAH BUFFKIN,
    RONALD JACKSON, JOANNE
    MORRISON, VALARIE M. COURTO-HILL,
    KIMBERLY TURNER, CONSTANCE L.
    HARRIS, STEPHANIE FLOWERS, B.
    YVONNE YOUNGER, DORIS J. YUFUF,
    LUCRETIA ROGERS, DANA N. LOCKETT,
    TAMARA BRASS, JAMES COLEMAN,
    SIDNEY TYUS, JACK L. McBRIDE,
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
     
     
     
     
          
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
      
     
    2
    PHYLLIS RYAN, DORIS LOPEZ, SHIRLEY
    A. VESSEL, MARY PEARSON, ANGELINE
    RECANDEZ, DELORES WASHINGTON,
    PATRICIA M. SALORIO, MICHELLE E.
    HOLMES, RY HANNAH, ADDIE
    HAWKINS, RONALD DOZIER, BARBARA
    GORDON, RALPH LEAKES, WILLIE
    LEAKS, JR., THEORDORE SHORTER, JR.,
    QUDALLA WARD, MICHAEL JONES,
    PEARLIE MAE MOSS, SHEILA DUNN,
    SHARON LEE, LAVERNE BULLOCK,
    HELEN CHARLES, EDWARD J. POE,
    ANTHONY BINGHAN, RENETTA GLASS
    WARD, LILLIAN OWENS, FREDDIE
    JOHNSON, MINNIE HORTON, CARL
    TRIBBLE, SR., CLAY APPLETON, SAM
    JOHNSON, GENEVA L. CHARLES and
    NATHANIEL CHARLES,
     
    Complainants,
     
    v.
     
    IFCO ICS-CHICAGO, INC.,
     
    Respondent.
     
      
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    PCB 02-208
    (Citizens Enforcement - Air)
     
    ORDER OF THE BOARD (by T. E. Johnson):
     
    On May 21, 2002, Local 3315 of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal
    Employees (AFSCME), Brian Finley, and other named individuals (complainants) filed a
    complaint alleging that IFCO ICS-Chicago, Inc. (IFCO) violated Section 9(a) of the
    Environmental Protection Act (Act) (415 ILCS 5/9(a) (2000)
    amended by
    P.A. 92-0574, eff.
    June 26, 2002) by emitting chemicals, odors, and smoke into the environment, resulting in air
    pollution. IFCO’s facility is located at 2300 West 13th Street in Chicago, Cook County.
     
    On November 18, 2002, the parties filed a joint motion asking the Board to dismiss the
    complaint because the parties have entered into a stipulation and proposed settlement agreement,
    which accompanied the motion. Mot. at 1. The parties assert in their joint motion that the Board
    is not obligated to hold a hearing before accepting this stipulation and proposal for settlement.
    Mot. at 1-2. The parties contend that Section 103.304 of the Board’s procedural rules indicates a
    hearing is only required in connection with a stipulation and proposal for settlement when the
    Board orders a hearing be held in accordance with Section 103.300(c). Mot. at 1. The parties
    argue that Section 103.300(c) only addresses settlements in enforcement actions brought by the
    State. Thus, assert the parties, the requirement that a hearing be held prior to the Board
     
      
     
    3
    approving an enforcement settlement only applies when the complaint is brought by the State.
    Id.
       
     
    Section 31(d)(1) of the Act states, “Any person may file with the Board a complaint,
    meeting the requirements of subsection (c) of this Section . . . .” Unless the Board determines
    that such complaint is duplicative or frivolous, it shall schedule a hearing.” 415 ILCS 5/31(d)(1)
    (2000)
    amended by
    P.A. 92-0574, eff. June 26, 2002). Section 31(c)(1) provides that a
    complaint “. . . shall require the person so complained against to answer the charges of such
    formal complaint at a hearing before the Board . . . .” Section 31(c)(2) provides an exception to
    the hearing requirement for stipulated settlements filed by the Attorney General. This exception
    was adopted in P.A. 87-134 that became effective on August 13, 1991. Prior to the adoption of
    P.A. 87-134, the Board required that hearing be held on all complaints including cases where the
    Attorney General filed stipulations.
    See e.g.,
    IEPA v. Ekco, PCB 88-177 (Feb. 23, 1989).
     
    The Board has consistently required citizen enforcement cases to proceed to hearing
    before a stipulation would be accepted.
    See e.g.,
    Lardner v. Dominick’s Finer Foods, Inc., PCB
    00-92 (Feb. 15, 2001); Malina v. Day, PCB 98-54 (July 22, 1999); Corning v. Thurela, PCB 96-
    69 (Aug. 15, 1996); and Landfill Emergency Action Committee v. McHenry County Sanitary
    Landfill and Recycling Center, Inc., PCB 85-9 (Jun. 20, 1986). No exception to the hearing
    requirement exists for citizen’s enforcement actions. Because Section 31(d) provides that a
    complaint must meet the 31(c) requirements, and 31(c)(1) requires a hearing, a hearing in a
    citizen’s enforcement action cannot be waived.
     
    The Board is not persuaded by the argument that its procedural rules do not require a
    hearing in a citizen’s enforcement action. In its December 21, 2000 opinion accompanying the
    procedural rules, the Board stated that it “will hold a hearing when parties to a citizen
    enforcement action ask the Board to approve the terms of the proposed settlement. If the parties
    do not desire a hearing on the proposed settlement, they may file a motion to dismiss the case.”
    Revision of the Board’s Procedural Rules: 35 Ill. Adm. Code 101–130, R00-20 (Dec. 21 2000),
    slip op. at 11.
     
     
    Accordingly, the Board denies the joint motion to dismiss the complaint. The parties are
    directed to proceed to a hearing on the proposed settlement if they desire the Board to enter the
    relief specified therein.
     
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
     
    Chairman C.A. Manning and Board Member M.E. Tristano dissented.
     
      
     
     
      
    4
     
    I, Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, certify that the Board
    adopted the above order on December 5, 2002, by a vote of 4-2.
     
    Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
    Illinois Pollution Control Board

    Back to top